This is probably related to this colour revolution thread from yesterday.
UAZ "Patriot" MIA trailers with barbwire now deployed in Minsk, capital of Belarus.
Additional forces deploying, including water cannons and a machine setting up barbwire.
Random photo of Belarus forces in Minsk, can't confirm for certain that it was taken today though.
Belarus, eh? I admit I could stand to brush up. Might as well start with wikipedia.
Belarus is a presidential republic, governed by a president and the National Assembly. Alexander Lukashenko has been the president of Belarus since 1994.
Sounds familiar. Let's look him up.
Lukashenko heads an authoritarian regime in Belarus.[5][6] Elections are not free and fair, opponents of the regime are repressed, and the media is not free.[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]
How awful! Two sources for that first claim, one is a BBC article from 2014, the other is from 2010 by some guy named Steven Levitsky. For the second claim, there's Levitsky, again; an article from the Guardian called "Inside Europe's Last Dictatorship", a 2007 Amnesty Int'l report that says protesters were detained and NGO's carefully monitored; a journal article from Electoral Studies, whose current editors-in-chief both work at the University of London; and a smattering of sources that were all added on May 21 of this year. "Dictator" and "authoritarian", when used by British and American media, especially, just mean "state executive we don't like," so whatever. A lot of the other sources appear to use similarly ill-defined language. The Electoral Studies article starts off:
In March 1994, [Belarus] became a presidential state... It then became an authoritarian state after its first presidential election (Dawisha and Parrott, 1997).
Wow. A brief glimmer of liberty, so quickly snuffed out smh. The full article is pay-walled, so I can't see the references, but it's probably this book from the Cambridge University Press.
So who's this Levitsky guy?
Steven Levitsky is an American political scientist and Professor of Government at Harvard University. At Harvard, Levitsky also serves on the Executive Committees of both the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs[3] and the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies.[4]
And what's the Weatherhead Center?
The aim of the Center is to confront the world's problems as diagnosed by its founders Robert R. Bowie and Henry Kissinger
Well, would you look at that! Alright, so what's the government really like?
In the 2012 parliamentary election, 105 of the 110 members elected to the House of Representatives were not affiliated with any political party. The Communist Party of Belarus won 3 seats, and the Agrarian Party and Republican Party of Labour and Justice, one each.[111] Most non-partisans represent a wide scope of social organizations such as workers' collectives, public associations, and civil society organizations, similar to the composition of the Soviet legislature.[112]
Uh oh! Can't have that! And Lukashenko?
Lukashenko opposed Western-backed shock therapy during the post-Soviet transition. He has supported state ownership of key industries in Belarus. Lukashenko's government has also retained much of the country's Soviet-era symbolism, especially those that are related to victory in World War II.[4]
ShockedPikachu.jpg
It's important to recognize here though that isn't like some worker's state or something. It's not Cuba. Like most post Soviet states, Belarus went chud pretty much right away.
It maintains Soviet aesthetics, but it is an authoritarian country in the coherent sense of the word. As in, it just maintains power for a small, self interested elite. If you call them socialist, you'd have to call like Saddam's Baath party socialist. Like it just isn't, it's basically anti left. State owned industries doesn't inherently mean socialist. Pemex in Mexico is state owned and it doesn't do shit for most regular people.
There's a tendency on the left to be contrarian to Western narratives because it's, frankly, reliable. But the reality is rarely that simple even if knee jerk opposing Western interests basically always is.
Obviously it's still a candidate for critical support. But heavy emphasis on the critical. No one actually likes Lukashenko, even if they like the opposition even less.
Oh for sure. Reflexive opposition to Western intervention and skepticism of their narrative is just, like, a given. You can do it braindead and basically never be wrong. Short of like ISIS or something, and even then.
But this is a case where the West doesn't need to exaggerate much. Belarus is one of those countries where cops give you a ticket for driving too slow. It basically fucking sucks.
Neoliberalization obviously won't make it better, and this is all some weird geopolitical play against Russia, who also fucking sucks.
Status quo is better than whatever the fuck is being attempted right now, probably. But it's not good right now. Belarus never recovered from the collapse.
Belarus is one of those countries where cops give you a ticket for driving too slow.
I mean, compared to the US where the cops murder you while you're asleep in your own bed when they show up at the wrong house, I'll take it.
Fair enough. Clearly I'm no expert on Belarusian politics or society. I don't think I typically assume that West Says Bad = Good. But it is interesting how reliable, as you say, it is that "authoritarian dictator" is code for "isn't playing along." But I shall endeavor to remain duly critical.
I have basically reached a point now where whenever I see the word "regime" my brain goes into "this is stinky" mode. It is not used by anyone writing anything remotely factual.
Same here. I can't really tell if it's become more blatant recently or if I've just become more aware or both, but I've really started noticing it lately.
Ok but Lukashenko is authoritarian and he does repress political opponents. Just because western media doesn't like him doesn't mean he's good.
It's coming from someone who is Russian and has friends in Belarus.
Lukashenko also denies the existence of Covid, opposes lgbtqia+, etc.
Elections were definitelt falsified, actual support for him is very low (hence, the massive protests).
Belarus isn't a socialist or a workers' state and it isn't called so. Why should anyone support this regime?
Hmm ok I see. But I think there is a difference between condemning US imperialism and supporting authoritarianism. I get that from american viewpoint this condemnation of Belarus regime seems like a propaganda, but from my view its very much correct, because I have people I know that live there. And, yeah, Lukashenko had it coming.
Fair enough. Clearly I'm no expert on Belarusian politics or society. I don't think I typically assume that West Says Bad = Good. But it is interesting how reliable it is that "authoritarian dictator" is code for "isn't playing along." But I shall endeavor to remain duly critical.
It feels so surreal to see so many of these types of unrest happening in the past couple days. Lebanon, now Belarus? By the way, wasn’t there something about Belarus merging back into Russia again or was that a theoretical thing?
Like twenty years ago there was a proposal to merge Belarus and Russia into an EU-like entity with open borders.
What's the risk?
NATO does what it wants. Take an advantage when you can grab it, expand Capital to a new country, put your enemies in check.
It's about what you can get away with, really.
